![]() |
|
|||||||
| RDM General Implementation Discussion General Discussion and questions relating to implementing RDM in a product. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#6 | |
|
Junior Member
|
Thank you Peter to spend some time looking at our issue.
It is becoming clearer but still I would like if I may getting some precision just to make sure. Personality for a 16 bit Dimmer: Slot Offset [0x0000, (0)] Slot Type [0x00, (0)] Primary Slot Slot Label ID [0x0001, (1)], Intensity ------------- Slot Offset [0x0001, (1)] Slot Type [0x01, (1)] Secondary Fine Slot Label ID [0x0000, (0)] In our example above (which is implemented as it is) regarding the Secondary should we have? Slot Label ID [0x0001, (1)], Intensity or Slot Label ID [0x0000, (0)] Currently we have Slot Label ID [0x0000, (0)] Quote:
We learnt the hard way recently that it is not because it is wrtitten that a responder support a specific PID that it is working as the standard says. |
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Responder Packet Timing issue | berntd | RDM Timing Discussion | 10 | May 27th, 2015 12:40 AM |
| New PID "Slot Labels" | este_ | RDM General Implementation Discussion | 5 | August 14th, 2014 09:26 AM |
| PARAMETER_DESCRIPTION data type semantics | tim_ecue | RDM Interpretation Questions | 4 | October 14th, 2009 10:47 AM |
| Slot Label Code | anstein | RDM General Implementation Discussion | 1 | August 10th, 2006 02:06 PM |